The trial court properly granted State's motion in limine seeking to prohibit any testimony or evidence about defendant's belief that the victim was over the age of consent in his trial on two counts each of child molestation and statutory rape because a defendant's knowledge of the age of the victim is not an essential element of either crime and, therefore, it was no defense that the accused reasonably believed that the victim was of the age of consent.

The Court partially reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendant in plaintiffs' suit for, inter alia, fraudulent concealment of negligent construction, negligent construction, maintaining an abatable nuisance and negligent construction of the utility lines arising out of the placement of utility easements in a subdivision defendant developed.

The evidence was sufficient to support an attorney's conviction for criminal contempt of court after he repeatedly filed several nearly identical petitions for scire facias under the wrong case number, the last of which was filed after the trial court had admonished him not to do so.

The trial court properly granted State's motion in limine seeking to prohibit any testimony or evidence about defendant's belief that the victim was over the age of consent in his trial on two counts each of child molestation and statutory rape because a defendants knowledge of the age of the victim is not an essential element of either crime and, therefore, it was no defense that the accused reasonably believed that the victim was of the age of consent.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain other acts evidence in a middle school band director's trial for enticing a child for indecent purposes and child molestation arising out of his interactions with a student.

The Court of Appeals vacated the denial of County's motion for summary judgment in construction company's suit arising out of a contract for the construction of a cultural center and remanded the case for further consideration because it did not appear that the trial court considered whether the parties strictly complied with the procedure for modifying the contract.

More from ALM

Premium Subscription

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.

Team Accounts

Our Team Account subscription service are for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.

Bundle Subscriptions

Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both option are priced the same.

From Data to Decisions

Exclusive Depth and Reach.

Legal Compass includes access to our exclusive industry reports, combining the unmatched expertise of our analyst team with ALM’s deep bench of proprietary information to provide insights that can’t be found anywhere else.

Big Pictures and Fine Details

Legal Compass delivers you the full scope of information, from the rankings of the Am Law 200 and NLJ 500 to intricate details and comparisons of firms’ financials, staffing, clients, news and events.